MORENA. GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO Q+A. I'M GREG BOYED. LABOUR'S ELECTION YEAR CONGRESS IS UNDERWAY IN WELLINGTON. AFTER NINE YEARS IN OPPOSITION, IS THIS THEIR YEAR TO GET BACK IN POWER? AND JESSICA MUTCH IS STANDING BY WITH ANDREW LITTLE, OUR LEAD INTERVIEW THIS MORNING. YET ANOTHER DRAMATIC WEEK IN AMERICAN POLITICS. PRESIDENT TRUMP FIRED HIS FBI DIRECTOR ` THE VERY MAN WHO WAS LEADING AN INQUIRY INTO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN'S ALLEGED LINKS WITH RUSSIA. VISITING NEW ZEALAND US CONSTITUTIONAL LAW EXPERT PROFESSOR NEIL SIEGEL GIVES US HIS TAKE. I THINK IT'S THE SINGLE MOST TROUBLING DECISION, ACT, THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS MADE. AND WITH A NEW ZEALAND ELECTION JUST FOUR MONTHS AWAY, SAY GOODBYE TO THE PARTY POLITICAL BROADCASTS OF OLD. MAN: VOTE NATIONAL. MAN: IT'S YOUR TURN NOW TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN. WITH NEW RULES IN PLACE AND DIGITAL ADVERTISING ON THE RISE, WHENA OWEN LOOKS AT HOW PARTIES WILL BE MAKING THEIR PITCH. AND JOINING ME TO DISCUSS ALL THIS AND MORE, OUR PANEL ` JOSIE PAGANI, PUBLIC AFFAIRS SPECIALIST AND DIRECTOR COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; KIM CAMPBELL, CEO OF THE EMPLOYERS AND MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION; MIKE WILLIAMS, FORMER LABOUR PARTY PRESIDENT, NOW CEO OF THE HOWARD LEAGUE FOR PENAL REFORM. BUT FIRST, HERE'S JESSICA. THANKS, GREG. AND GOOD MORNING TO LABOUR LEADER ANDREW LITTLE, WHO JOINS US FROM TE PAPA, WHERE LABOUR IS HOLDING THEIR CONGRESS THIS WEEKEND. I want to start off asking you ` four months out from the election a place where labour is that? I'm pleased about the state of the party and caucus. As I get around the country, the feedback is overwhelming. People are saying there are things happening in New Zealand that they are unhappy with. They're looking for a change. Our challenge over the next four months is to harness that. What about money how is labour doing on that front? Do you have enough money to fight this? We are doing very well. The bulk of our donations and contributions is from small donations. About $37. We get a lot of those. We get a small share of corporate donations. But the bulk of our funds is from ordinary Kiwis making small contributions. We are way ahead of where we have bee.n I want to start off talking about immigration. You are saying you're going to cut immigration by tens of thousands. How are you going to do that? I have a detailed policy will be announcing in a few weeks. We're looking at the number of work visas we are issuing. 42,000, including from occupations we can start from New Zealand. We are looking at the student Visa area as well. We are allowing students into courses that are frankly a very low quality. This is a policy that is about recognising we are a country based on immigration, but the numbers arriving to settle here are more that we can cope with. We have cities that are choking and clogged and we can't keep up. We need to have a breather. We need a chance to build houses and sort out traffic problems. The way you have just talked about immigration, saying we need a breather and the cities are clogged, it doesn't sound like a natural fit for labour. What you say to that? You have to look at problems as they are. Auckland in particular has got thousands of people arriving, tens of thousands, to settle each year. Does this sit comfortably with you as a leader to talk about? Yes. I want everyone coming here to have a good quality of life. But they won't have the schools of full and they can't move around the city comfortably. Could some people liken your policy to New Zealand first? No. I focus solely on the number of people coming here is more than we can cope with. It is not about where people come from. Where a country built on immigration. We need skills and talents here that we don't already have. I am a first-generation New Zealander. My parents were immigrants. But I've got to look at what is happening to our cities. We can't keep doing what we're doing. We need to take a breather, slow down. Is it a side effect that you can work with Winston Peters is it a nice bonus out of this? I am totally confident I can work with Winston Peters on this. He has a view on emigration that is about reducing numbers. For labour it is about managing immigration better. We don't want to compound the problems we have got with overcrowding and stretched services and clogged transport networks. We can't say we are a country offering a good lifestyle if we keep doing that. We asked for questions on Facebook. DUNCAN ROSS ` WHY IS YOUR PARTY BEGINNING TO TOUT A NATIONALIST LINE WHEN IT'S OBVIOUS THAT THE PROBLEM IS NOT IMMIGRANTS, BUT THE NEOLIBERAL SYSTEM WE OPERATE UNDER? What you say to that? They are not wrong about that. The way we have managed immigration and failed to manage issues like making sure housing numbers are keeping up, our traffic is being managed properly, there has been a complete mismatch in all of that. But the reality right now is we have a major problem and we cannot cope with all the people coming to settle here. It is a pragmatic stance to say to slow it down. Let's get to work on building the houses and sorting out the traffic, on making sure the schools can accommodate everybody who needs to go there. Take a breather and get that right, and when we get those things functioning and working well, then continue to focus on getting the skills and talents we need for the good of the economy. I want to ask you about charter schools now. Willie Jackson talked about them being called partnership schools under labour. Is that accurate? We made it pretty clear we don't like the charter schools and we are going to appeal that legislation. But we're not going to disrupt any child's education. We have minimum standards registered teachers and teaching the curriculum. We're going to talk to charter schools about continuity. We have to have an education system that is preparing every New Zealand child for success in the future. That is about having the right learning environment. When you are saying you won't disrupt children, you're saying your keep charter schools open? No. I'm saying we will look at each and every one of them. I don't know what the state of each and every one of them is. You said you won't disrupt its educations. We will make sure the school that are being publicly funded will meet those minimum requirements. Labour is the party of the special character schools. You do sometimes need different learning environments for kids of Thrive in Excel. Isn't special character still just another name for charter schools? No. No, I don't think so at all. The special character schools had requirements attached to them. Sometimes aspects of the learning environment have to be different. We want every New Zealand child to have the best possible education and be prepared for success. I want to get this really clear, because there has been a lot of talk about this. Well charter schools close under the Labour Party? We are going to repeal the charter schools legislation. Is that a yes or no? I am being very clear. We will talk to existing charter schools about continuation. We are not going to have schools that don't require teachers to be trained and registered and we're not going to continue to publicly funded schools that don't teach to the national curriculum. There are some schools doing amazing stuff, and if there our charter schools that meet the requirement, we will talk to them about continuation. But we're going to repeal the charter schools legislation because that model isn't good. There has been taught this week about having Maori Value set up in the prison system. I talked to Kelvin Davis about this on the show a few weeks ago. Why will you entertain that idea about treating the prison system differently and are less keen to look at different solutions when it comes with education? I think you're wrong on both counts. It is not a policy of ours to have special Maori presence. Would you look at having that is a labour policy? We need to look at the hideous statistic that over half the prison population is Maori when they represent 18% of the population. We need to have a good discussion and examination of that. When it comes to education, where the party of special character schools. We recognise that for some kids you do need a different learning environment. It is not about being not able to look at alternatives. Where things aren't working, we have to look at differences. And we are open to that. I want to move on to leadership now. Do you agree that to vote for you people need to feel like they are connecting to you emotionally? And do you feel like you're doing a good job of that? I have been going around the country doing these public meetings and we have been having great attendance. The message to me is overwhelming. People talk to me one-on-one, and they like what I'm saying. A lot of kiwis are saying they are fearful for their children and grandchildren not getting to own their own home. They don't like what is happening for the young and unemployed. They don't like that their parents and grandparents can't get the help they need. People are looking for something different. Let's talk about what you offer that's different. We were talking this morning about your family situation. None of us are sure whether you had children and we didn't know much about your wife either. Do you want to keep that out of the political arena? People want to know not my living and family arrangements are. We have a 15 year old son. We had made a conscious decision to keep him out of the limelight. It's not fair for me to oppose on him getting out there publicly. He decides what level of publicity he gets. He has a 10 age are in school and I don't want a whole lot of attention focused on him. We have a small family living in Wellington. There has been the old woman's magazine article about that stuff. People do know that I come from a family background, have very strong family links, I am very family oriented. That is important to me. But that is the kiwi story. It is important that people connect to you on their level, isn't it? And we get to know you on that level if you're going to be the next prime minister. Your family need their privacy. Yet they are not standing for public office. But people need to know who was next to me are near me. I talk a lot about my son and wife. But they are not flashing up on images all over the place. Perhaps in contrast to some of the former leaders. In terms of the image side of things, are you working on that? You have a reputation for being quite defensive sometimes in the media. And that name angry and he pops up. Are you conscious of that and are you working on that? CORRECTION: Angry Andy. I am not going to apologise for that. I have had the great benefit of growing up in this country of ours. Are you working on that reputation? Semen defensive and a bit angry and the media sometimes. CORRECTION: Seeming. I am passionate about my values and views. And this amazing country I have the privilege of living in. I want everyone here to have the benefit of this beautiful country and the opportunities it has to offer. Too many people are missing out. I want New Zealanders to be in a country where they can say, of all their fellow citizens, that everyone gets a fair go. Is this job harder than you thought it would be? It is a tough job but I have never shied away from tough jobs. One thing I would say of myself as I'm used to throw myself in the deep end. I did it as a young lawyer and a union leader and I am doing it in this job. I don't mind tough jobs and when the going gets tough it spurs me on. I am very determined to make a difference and what labour has to offer New Zealand, as we campaign for the selection. Thank you very much for your time. LABOUR LEADER ANDREW LITTLE SPEAKING TO JESSICA FROM THE LABOUR CONGRESS IN WELLINGTON. SEND US YOUR THOUGHTS. WE'RE ON TWITTER @NZQANDA YOU CAN EMAIL US AT Q+A@TVNZ.CO.NZ OR TEXT YOUR THOUGHTS AND FIRST NAME TO 2211. KEEP THEM BRIEF ` EACH TEXT COSTS 50C. WE'LL BRING IN OUR PANEL AFTER THE BREAK. LET'S BRING IN OUR PANEL ` JOSIE PAGANI, PUBLIC AFFAIRS SPECIALIST AND DIRECTOR COUNCIL FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; KIM CAMPBELL, CEO OF THE EMPLOYERS AND MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION. MIKE WILLIAMS, FORMER LABOUR PARTY PRESIDENT, NOW CEO OF THE HOWARD LEAGUE FOR PENAL REFORM. Did Andrew Little look like someone who could be our next Prime Minister? Indeed. Unfortunately were in a world of celebrity and personality. Andrew is what he is. He is a good Kiwi. Men and women of probity. They care a lot about the country. I think all of them what the similar things for New Zealanders. It's the howl that's important. He has to produce coherent and meaningful public policy. As a personality, he is thoroughly a decent fellow. From the business community, we know who ears. He is a trustworthy man. But is that enough? He seemed more authentically himself. That's what I've seen him do actually. He just needs to be embraced being angry Andy. He is passionate. But be passionate about the right things. Not just be angry at a journalist. But don't turn him into Trudeau. I thought it was a great answer on charter schools. Rather than being defensive in not answering the question, he went back to the reason why they are saying no. You shouldn't have to live to Willie Jackson school to get a good education. No, Willie Jackson can like it or lump it, we are not going to do this. What do people want to hear? I think he handled that very well compare to previously. There are Montessori schools in Grey Lynn. But I agree with Josie. And that is much the better interview that Andrew has done. He is evolving. I was the only one who knew his wife's name. I was the only one who knew he had a kid. I got the kids age wrong. We know the name of the cat of John Key. What trips him up is their policy on immigration all the time. The stronger message for labour is actually equality. And people are equally worried about in this election. And if there are focused on bringing more wealth and power and opportunities of the many not the few, the bottom line is you can stop immigration today and have no foreigners in New Zealand and you would still have unaffordable houses. They've got to join up their policies. That hasn't happened yet. There are nearly 100,000 young people who don't have educational training. But we are sucking in all these labourers. We have to say what were going to do about those young people to plug those gaps in the market. In Hawke's Bay, unemployment never falls below three and half thousand. But in the height of the picking season, we have 4000 people picking apples and pears and plums. Jessica made the point that it doesn't seem like a labour message. It also seems like it's Winston Peter's backyard. This is a problem with all these policies. There is very little differentiation. If you unpack the immigration story, there's really nothing in it. 35,000 Kiwis coming home. Every year. Look at Auckland's transport problems. A lot of problems people are blaming on immigration are created from other things. Policy has to be created where there is true differentiation. Bearing in mind, to win, Andrew has to pull some voters from elsewhere. His stake is that he is on the same page as Winston Peters, but they are not. There are policies coming out now which I think is great. But is it going to bring anybody over who is not already voting labour? It's the big picture and the big story. Why do you forward labour? In France last week, the big story there was if you wanted to say no to nasty politics and racism in isolation and you want to be an open country, vote for Macron. It didn't matter that some of his policies were jarred a little bit right-wing. What's the big story? What's the big reason why you forward labour? I think it's to do with making it more equal. Andrew has got to focus on policies where there is a big difference and that is housing. And he has been trying to do that. This immigration is a side track. Housing is where they should focus. He has been focusing on it. But it's not getting any traction. When you dive into housing as we have, it's tied up in the planning laws and competition laws and standards of the buildings themselves. As locational planning and so forth. All of those things need to be dealt with before you actually start solving it. With the people cannot buy a house because the average which cannot buy a house. That is an inequality problem there is another lens to look at this. It's sure, more progressive labour message to goal if you're in a 1%, you don't need to have connections to Russia. You just have to have house in Parnell. No matter which way you card Ted and how human, that is a long difference between national labour. That gets Willie Jackson into Parliament if you sustain it. I think this campaign will be different. What we have seen in the past elections is that campaigns have Polls that did not budge. What you will see in this campaign are oppositions who are equally matched. On that subject, you've got the Winston Peters factor in there as well. This is the problem. Anywhere you want to do the maths, you going to end up with some very very strange bedfellows. There has been quite a change in the complexion of greens. Now we are seeing a younger, more well-educated more middle-of-the-road green person they are. I'm not sure how that will play up with the younger people who are quite cynical about the major parties. In Western Australia, huge victory for labour. They campaigned as a true Labour Party. They campaigned on wages, jobs and health services. And that was it. And they want. It was a huge victory. I think the point Kim made MMP is still very large extent a lottery. You get very large results. They've got to aim higher. COMING UP AFTER THE BREAK ` PRESIDENT TRUMP SACKED HIS FBI DIRECTOR THIS WEEK ` THE MAN LEADING THE POLITICALLY CHARGED INQUIRY INTO HIS CAMPAIGN LINKS WITH RUSSIA. IS AMERICA FACING A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS? A U.S LAW EXPERT TELLS US WHAT HE THINKS. FORMER FBI DIRECTOR JAMES COMEY FOUND OUT HE'D BEEN FIRED THIS WEEK WHEN THE NEWS FLASHED UP ON TV SCREENS AT THE EVENT WHERE HE WAS SPEAKING. IT COULDN'T HAVE BEEN MORE PERFECT ` THE EVENTS OF THE WEEK HAVE PLAYED OUT LIKE A TELEVISION DRAMA, WITH MORE TWISTS AND TURNS TO RIVAL 'HOUSE OF CARDS'. WATCHING CLOSELY FROM WELLINGTON WAS PROFESSOR NEIL SIEGEL, AN EXPERT ON THE US CONSTITUTION FROM DUKE UNIVERSITY, NORTH CAROLINA. HE'S BEEN VISITING VICTORIA UNIVERSITY ON A FELLOWSHIP, SO ON FRIDAY I ASKED HIM WHAT HE MADE OF COMEY'S SACKING. I THINK IT'S THE SINGLE MOST TROUBLING DECISION, ACT, THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS MADE, NOT JUST SINCE ASSUMING OFFICE, BUT, REALLY, SINCE ENTERING AMERICAN POLITICAL LIFE. SO YOU DON'T BUY THE PRESIDENT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR WHY HE'S DONE THIS? WELL, I MEAN, HE HAS LIED SO REPEATEDLY THROUGHOUT HIS SHORT PRESIDENCY AND THEN DURING THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN, IT'S NOT CLEAR WHY ANYONE WOULD START BELIEVING HIM NOW. THEN ONCE YOU START TO INTERROGATE THE REASONS, THEY DON'T REALLY SEEM TO ADD UP. FOR THE FIRST TIME IN OUR NATION'S HISTORY, THE FBI DIRECTOR, WHO SERVES A 10-YEAR TERM IN ORDER TO INSULATE HIM OR HER FROM POLITICAL INFLUENCE, HAS BEEN FIRED BY THE PRESIDENT, AND THE DIRECTOR IS LEADING THE INVESTIGATION INTO POTENTIAL WRONGDOING BY THE PRESIDENT AND HIS INNER CIRCLE. BUT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, THE PRESIDENT IS ALLOWED TO DO THIS. THE FBI DIRECTOR SERVES AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT. THAT'S RIGHT. THE QUESTION HERE IS NOT WHETHER THE PRESIDENT HAS THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO DO THIS. IT'S RELATIVELY CLEAR THAT HE DOES. BUT MY GREATEST CONCERNS WITH THIS PRESIDENT IS NOT ALLEGED ILLEGALITY ` ALTHOUGH THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME, AND THERE MAY STILL BE. IT'S REALLY VIOLATIONS OF LONG-STANDING NORMS AND CONVENTIONS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO GUIDE AND DISCIPLINE OCCUPANTS OF THE WHITE HOUSE. THE STATED REASON FOR THE FIRING IS THAT THE FBI DIRECTOR HAD MISHANDLED THE INVESTIGATION INTO HILLARY CLINTON'S USE OF A PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER WHILE SECRETARY OF STATE. AND YET, WE KNOW, BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY ON RECORD AS APPLAUDING THE FBI DIRECTOR FOR REOPENING THAT INVESTIGATION IN THE WANING DAYS OF THE ELECTION CAMPAIGN, AND SO THAT STATED REASON SIMPLY DOESN'T HOLD UP. SO THE QUESTION IS ` WHAT MIGHT THE ACTUAL REASON BE? AND THE ACTUAL REASON SEEMS TO BE ` IF YOU FIRE SOMEONE WHO'S IN CHARGE OF INVESTIGATING YOU, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT. PARTICULARLY HIS LETTER FIRING THE FBI DIRECTOR, THE PRESIDENT SAID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT HIS HANDLING OR MISHANDLING OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO HILLARY CLINTON. INSTEAD, THE PRESIDENT COULDN'T HELP HIMSELF FROM INVOKING THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT HE IS PERSONALLY UNDER INVESTIGATION. AND SO THE PRESIDENT OFTEN CAN'T RESIST THE TEMPTATION TO TELL YOU WHAT'S ACTUALLY ON HIS MIND, WHATEVER THE STATED OR FORMAL JUSTIFICATION BEING OFFERED BY HIS ADMINISTRATION. AS AN EXPERT IN THIS AREA, ARE YOU WATCHING THIS LIKE A BIT OF A CAR WRECK? IS IT FASCINATING BUT AWFUL AT THE SAME TIME? UH,... I WOULDN'T USE THE WORD 'FASCINATING', BECAUSE IT'S SO DEEPLY DISTRESSING. UH, I... I BELIEVE IN THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM FOR ALL ` ITS IMPERFECTIONS AND FLAWS. AND I COULD GO ON AT LENGTH ABOUT THEM. BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP IS UNLIKE ANY AMERICAN POLITICIAN I HAVE SEEN IN AT LEAST MY LIFETIME ` I'M 45 YEARS OLD ` AND REALLY BEYOND MY LIFETIME ` HIS DEGREE OF DISREGARD OF NORMS AND CONVENTIONS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO RESTRAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS; HIS VIOLATIONS OF WAYS OF CONDUCTING ONESELF THAT ARE ESSENTIAL TO MAINTAINING THE CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM. NO OTHER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT IS LIKE HIM, NO OTHER DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE, NO OTHER PREVIOUS REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE, AGAIN, IN RECENT MEMORY. AND SO I WOULDN'T USE THE WORD 'FASCINATING'. THERE ARE FASCINATING QUESTIONS IN MY CAPACITY AS A SCHOLAR, BUT IN MY CAPACITY AS A LAW PROFESSOR WHO IS INVESTED IN THE SUCCESS OF THE SYSTEM, WORDS LIKE 'CONCERNING', 'TROUBLING', 'DEEPLY DISTRESSING' AND A REAL DESIRE TO MAKE SURE THAT IT` THE DAMAGE IS LIMITED AND THAT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN, BOTH AT HOME AND ABROAD, INCLUDING HERE IN NEW ZEALAND. BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP HAS COME OUT AND SAID THAT THE CONSTITUTION IS ACTUALLY GETTING IN HIS WAY AND HINDERING HIM IN SOME WAYS. I'LL READ YOU A QUOTE FROM HIM. HE SAYS, 'IT'S A ROUGH SYSTEM, AN ARCHAIC SYSTEM. 'IT'S REALLY BAD FOR THE COUNTRY.' DO THESE COMMENTS ALARM AND CONCERN YOU AS WELL? I WOULD NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS REFERRING TO. IF YOU'RE SAYING HE'S ASCRIBING THAT AS THE US CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM` HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION IN THAT QUOTE, YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S, UM` YEAH, IF THAT'S CORRECT, THEN, YES, THAT'S QUITE, UH... THAT'S QUITE TROUBLING. THIS IS NOT HOW PRESIDENTS UNDERSTAND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE CONSTITUTION; THEY UNDERSTAND THE CONSTITUTION AS AUTHORISING THEM TO TAKE ACTIONS WITHIN THE LAW AND WITHIN THE NORMS AND CONVENTIONS IN EXECUTING THEIR RESPONSIBILITY AS WELL AS LIMITING THE KIND OF CONDUCT THEY CAN ENGAGE IN. NOW, I DO TAKE HEART IN THE FACT THAT THERE ARE OTHER CRITICAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE STANDING UP AND PUSHING BACK` LIKE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN THE MEDIA, FOR EXAMPLE? LIKE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, LIKE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, LIKE THE MAINSTREAM NEWS MEDIA, LIKE THE LEGAL ACADEMY, LIKE OTHER INSTITUTIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY. WHAT WE'VE SEEN NOW IN RESPONSE TO THE FIRING OF THE FBI DIRECTOR IS A VERY, VERY STRONG PUSHBACK BY VARIOUS` ARE THEY DOING THEIR JOBS, DO YOU THINK? CAN THEY DO THEIR JOBS WITH THIS PRESIDENT? I THINK THEY ARE. I THINK THEY ARE. THE MOST FREQUENT COMMENT I'VE GOTTEN FROM NEW ZEALANDERS SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE IS, 'HOW CAN HE GET AWAY WITH IT?' 'HOW CAN THIS BE HAPPENING?' AND MY OWN VIEW IS THAT IT'S NOT AT ALL CLEAR THAT HE IS GETTING AWAY WITH IT. I MEAN, HE IS THE PRESIDENT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS HE'S REMOVED FROM OFFICE OR DOESN'T EARN RE-ELECTION. THAT IS TRUE. BUT HIS APPROVAL RATING IN THE MOST RECENT POLL I SAW THIS MORNING IS AT 35%. THAT IS ASTONISHINGLY LOW FOR A US PRESIDENT AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS OR HER TERM. THIS IS THE HONEYMOON PERIOD; THIS IS WHEN THE POPULARITY'S SUPPOSED TO BE AT A MAXIMUM. ON JUST ABOUT EVERY ISSUE, MORE AMERICANS ARE OPPOSED TO HIM THAN ARE IN FAVOUR OF WHAT HE WANTS TO DO. AND ON THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE ISSUES, HE LACKS MAJORITY SUPPORT. HE HAS HAD NO GREAT LEGISLATIVE SUCCESSES TO DATE, AND HE JUST MADE IT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT FOR HIM TO HAVE ANY LEGISLATIVE SUCCESSES, GIVEN THE DEGREE OF BACKLASH TO HIS TERMINATION OF FORMER DIRECTOR COMEY. SO I DON'T SEE HIM GETTING AWAY WITH IT; I SEE THESE OTHER INSTITUTIONS STANDING UP AND BEING COUNTED. NOW, THEY'RE ALL IMPERFECT, AND THE POLARISATION THAT IS INFLICTING THE COUNTRY IS INFLICTING THESE INSTITUTIONS AS WELL; THE MEDIA HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY POLARISED, FOR EXAMPLE. BUT I STILL TAKE HEART IN THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT SIMPLY DEFERRING TO THE PRESIDENT, SAYING, 'YES, SIR,' GIVING HIM THE DEGREE OF PERSONAL LOYALTY AND IMPUNITY THAT HE DEMANDS AND THAT HE DIDN'T SEE IN DIRECTOR COMEY. AND I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY HE FIRED HIM. FROM AN OUTSIDER POINT OF VIEW, THOUGH, IT SEEMS THAT THIS IS WHAT THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR DONALD TRUMP WANTED FROM A PRESIDENT. THEY DIDN'T WANT A POLITICIAN; THEY DIDN'T WANT SOMEONE WHO JUST SAID YES TO THE NORMS; THEY WANTED SOMEONE TO SHAKE THAT UP. DO YOU THINK PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO REGRET THAT DECISION NOW WHEN THEY SEE IT PLAYING OUT? WELL, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO BREAK DOWN WHO ARE THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR HIM. SO HE HAS A POLITICAL BASE THAT IS MAYBE, I DON'T KNOW, 35%, MAYBE 40% OF THE COUNTRY ON A GOOD DAY, AND I THINK SOME OF THEM HAVE REGRETS. BUT I THINK THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM ARE THE WAY YOU DESCRIBE. THE PHRASE WE OFTEN HEAR THAT YOU JUST INVOKED IS 'SHAKE THINGS UP', WHICH AGAIN BRINGS TO MY MIND MIXING TOGETHER DANGEROUS CHEMICALS THE PHRASE WE OFTEN HEAR THAT YOU JUST INVOKED IS 'SHAKE THINGS UP', WHICH AGAIN BRINGS TO MY MIND MIXING TOGETHER DANGEROUS CHEMICALS IN ORDER TO CAUSE AN EXPLOSION. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY MEAN, RIGHT? THEY MEAN REJECTING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND THE STATUS QUO. AND THEY SEEM TO LIKE, AND MAYBE EVEN LOVE, HIS BEHAVIOUR. I HOPE, AS TIME GOES ON AND THEY PAY ATTENTION, THAT HE'S NOT BRINGING BACK ALL THE JOBS HE PROMISED, THAT HE'S POPULATED THE WHITE HOUSE WITH HIS FAMILY AND HIS CABINET WITH BILLIONAIRES, THAT HE IS NOT THE SORT OF POPULIST PERSON WHO HAS THEIR BACK THAT HE'S REPRESENTED HIMSELF TO BE. IN YOUR ADDRESS, YOU TALKED ABOUT DONALD TRUMP'S VIEWS ON NORMS AND CONVENTIONS RUBBING OFF ON OTHER COUNTRIES. WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT? WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, I'VE BEEN WATCHING THE NEWS, INCLUDING YOUR WONDERFUL CHANNEL, AND I'VE WORRIED, JUST AS AN AMERICAN ABROAD ` ARE AUSTRALIANS RESPONDING THE WAY DONALD TRUMP WOULD? NOT JUST IN THEIR TREATMENT OF REFUGEES, WHICH RAISES A LOT OF ALARM BELLS AND THE EXPRESS, UM,... RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION IN THAT REFUGEE POLICY, WHICH BRINGS TO MIND PRESIDENT TRUMP'S EXECUTIVE ORDERS ON IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEES, BUT ALSO MORE RECENTLY IN THE TREATMENT OF STUDENTS FROM NEW ZEALAND. IT SOUNDS LIKE AN 'AUSTRALIA FIRST' SORT OF POLICY. THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF THAT ` 'IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH 'FOR THE WORLD'S SUPERPOWER, IF IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE UNITED STATES, 'IT SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR US.' NOW, I SHOULD ALSO SAY THAT JUST` I ALSO` IT DOESN'T JUST CUT ONE WAY; THERE MAY BE OTHER COUNTRIES WHO ARE SEEING THE VERY BAD EXAMPLE THAT DONALD TRUMP IS SETTING AND PUSHING BACK. I THINK` THE RECENT ELECTION IN FRANCE ` I DON'T THINK IT WAS SIMPLY ABOUT THE UNITED STATES; IT WAS PRIMARILY ABOUT FRANCE AND WHERE THE FRENCH PEOPLE WANT TO GO. BUT PRESIDENT OBAMA WEIGHED IN HEAVILY IN FAVOUR OF THE WINNER AND TO THE EXTENT IT WAS A CHOICE BETWEEN THE OBAMA MODEL AND THE TRUMP MODEL, I THINK THE FRENCH PEOPLE EMPHATICALLY CHOSE THE OBAMA MODEL. AFTER THE BREAK, WHENA OWEN LOOKS AT THE NEW WAYS POLITICAL PARTIES WILL BE TARGETTING YOU THIS ELECTION. SO, ESSENTIALLY, THEY CAN SPONSOR POSTS, SO SOME OF THEM MIGHT FEEL LIKE IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN POSTED BY A FRIEND OF YOURS, BUT IT'S KIND OF COMING FROM A POLITICAL PARTY THEMSELVES. EXPECT TO SEE A FEW CHANGES THIS ELECTION IN THE WAY PARTIES AND CANDIDATES DELIVER THEIR MESSAGES. IN THE PAST, TVNZ AND RADIO NEW ZEALAND WERE OBLIGED TO PROVIDE AIR TIME FOR PARTY POLITICAL BROADCASTS. A TWEAK TO THE BROADCASTING ACT HAS CHANGED THAT. OVERSEAS, DIGITAL ADVERTISING HAS ALSO BECOME A KEY TOOL IN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNING. SO HOW WILL OUR PARTIES MAKE THEIR PITCH? THIS STORY FROM WHENA OWEN. MAN: THE FOLLOWING IS A PARTY POLITICAL BROADCAST. THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT PROTECTING OUR COUNTRY AND OUR FUTURE. IT'S ABOUT FEELING GOOD ABOUT BEING PART OF SOMETHING. FORGET THE FEAR MERCHANTS AND THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO RUN YOUR LIFE. BUT NICE TALK IS NOT ENOUGH. IT IS HIGH TIME TO PUT A STOP TO ALL THIS NONSENSE. TRUST YOURSELVES, BECAUSE YOU KNOW BEST. YOU HAVE MY ABSOLUTE WORD ON THAT. YES, PARTY POLITICAL BROADCASTS ARE NOW HISTORY. NO MORE OPENING AND CLOSING ADDRESSES. DISAPPOINTED? WELL, PARTIES WILL STILL BE SELLING THEIR MESSAGE. AT MASSEY UNIVERSITY, DR CLAIRE ROBINSON HAS BEEN TRACKING THE CHANGES ON HOW THE POLITICAL MESSAGE WILL BE DELIVERED. SO WE WON'T BE SEEING, FOR THE FIRST TIME, PARTY POLITICAL BROADCASTS THIS YEAR. NO, THAT'S RIGHT. SO INSTEAD, WHAT THEY WILL DO IS THEY WILL NO, THAT'S RIGHT. SO INSTEAD, WHAT THEY WILL DO IS THEY WILL USE THE MONEY TO EITHER PRODUCE OR PURCHASE TIME ON TELEVISION OR RADIO IN SHORTER BURSTS. SO YOU MIGHT GET A WHOLE LOT OF FIVE-SECOND ADS OR 15-SECOND ADS. THE OTHER CHANGES THAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO SPEND THEIR MONEY ON INTERNET ADVERTISING. SO THAT'S THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY'VE BEEN ALLOWED TO DO THAT. GREAT. OUTSIDE THE OFFICIAL THREE-MONTH CAMPAIGN PERIOD, PARTIES CAN USE THEIR OWN FUNDS TO RUN ADS ` LIKE THIS GREENS PARTY AD RELEASED LAST MONTH ON THE NET. JUST LIKE RADIO AND TELEVISION, ADS CANNOT BE POSTED ON THE NET ON ELECTION DAY. BUT NOTHING IS STOPPING INDIVIDUALS ON SOCIAL MEDIA FROM SHARING CAMPAIGN ADS ON ELECTION DAY. GREAT! THIS ELECTION, THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION HAS INCREASED THE TOTAL AMOUNT GIVEN ACROSS THE POLITICAL PARTIES TO $3.6M. THAT'S DIVIDED UP, WITH THE LARGER PARTIES RECEIVING MORE. DR ROBINSON RECKONS THAT NEEDS REVIEWING. SO THERE IS AN ARGUMENT FOR FLIPPING IT AND SAYING THAT THE SMALLER PARTIES COULD GET MORE MONEY FROM THE ELECTORAL COMMISSION TO BROADCAST OR ADVERTISE TO ENABLE THEM TO GET THEIR POLICIES OUT. THANKS FOR TUNING IN. MY NAME IS COLIN CRAIG. HELLO. I'M PETER DUNNE. SO WITH EVERYBODY GETTING MORE MONEY THIS TIME AROUND, HOW CAN THEY GET THE BEST BANG FOR THEIR BUCK? HOW SHOULD THEY BE SELLING THEIR MESSAGE? Q+A ASKED ADVERTISING GURU PETER BIGGS. PEOPLE HAVE TO FEEL SOMETHING. I MEAN, OBAMA HAD IT, WHICH WAS HOPE. SIMILARLY, TRUMP HAD IT. WE ARE LIVING IN A REALLY REALLY INTERESTING WORLD, WHERE EMOTIONAL VALUES ARE STILL ENORMOUSLY STRONG. YES, IT'S A DIGITAL WORLD; ESSENTIALLY, WHAT GOES DOWN THAT PIPE IS THE IMPORTANT CONTENT ` WHICH HAS TO BE DISTINCTIVE, WHICH HAS TO BE EMOTIONAL, WHICH HAS TO BE HUMAN, WHICH HAS TO BE ORIGINAL, AND WHICH PEOPLE WANT TO LISTEN TO. MAN: IN TIMES OF CRISIS, AMERICA DEPENDS ON STEADY LEADERSHIP. KNOCK THE CRAP OUT OF THEM, SERIOUSLY, WOULD YOU? THIS IS CALLED A NEGATIVE, OR ATTACK ADD. BELIEVE IT OR NOT, THEY'RE ALLOWED HERE BUT RARELY MADE. BOTH SING: # THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR HIGH TAXATION! # WHY DON'T WE USE NEGATIVE ADVERTISING AS MUCH AS THE STATES? WE DO USE NEGATIVE ADVERTISING IN VERY SHORT, SHARP BURSTS, BUT NEW ZEALANDERS DON'T LIKE IT VERY MUCH. PEOPLE START TO SAY, 'OH, BUT THAT'S NOT VERY NEW ZEALAND,' AND THEN THEY DISAPPEAR. (CROWD CHEER) OBAMA WAS THE FIRST TO TRULY UTILISE TWITTER AS A CAMPAIGN TOOL IN THE 2008 ELECTION. TRUMP CLAIMED FACEBOOK, AND TWITTER HELPED HIM WIN THE ELECTION. HERE, OVER 2.5 MILLION NEW ZEALANDERS HAVE FACEBOOK ACCOUNTS, ACCORDING TO FACEBOOK, WHICH COLLECTS DETAILED DATA ON EACH USER. IN THE COMMERCIAL WORLD, DATA IS KIND OF THE NEW GOLD DUST, REALLY. SO IN THIS ELECTION, AND THE FUTURE, HOW MUCH MORE WILL WE, AS VOTERS, BE FILTERED AND MICRO TARGETED BY OUR POLITICAL PARTIES? THOMAS LE BAS AT MASSEY UNIVERSITY TOOLS LIKE FACEBOOK TO TARGET VOTERS BASED ON DETAILED PERSONAL INFORMATION. WHEREAS THINGS LIKE DEMOGRAPHICS, SUCH AS EDUCATION, GENERATION, LIVE EVENTS, ET CETERA; LIFE EVENTS, ET CETERA; YOUR INTERESTS, SUCH AS YOUR BUSINESS, FOOD AND DRINK, FITNESS, WELLNESS. WOULD YOU WATCH A PARTY AD ON TV? I DON'T HAVE TV, SO I DON'T ACTUALLY WATCH THAT KIND OF STUFF ANY MORE. SO I'M A LITTLE BIT OUT OF THAT BUBBLE. BECAUSE THOMAS IS PART OF THE NEW BUBBLE POLITICIANS WANT TO REACH. MOST INSTITUTIONS, THEIR AUTHORITY IS BREAKING DOWN. TECHNOLOGY IS DISRUPTING ALL OF THAT. SO HOW DID POLITICAL PARTIES IN PARTICULAR MOVE AWAY FROM BEING PARENT-CHILD? WE HAVE ALL OF THE ANSWERS FOR YOU. WE HAVE ALL OF THE POLICIES FOR YOU. AND HOW DID THEY GET KIWIS AND MODERN AUDIENCES TO CONTRIBUTE IDEAS FOR POLICY AND GENERALLY LISTEN TO THEM? THAT'S A CHALLENGE FOR POLITICAL PARTIES. YOU COULD SAY SOCIAL MEDIA NOW MEANS POLITICIANS ARE ALWAYS PROMOTING, ALWAYS CAMPAIGNING. FOR THAT, CLAIRE ROBINSON WOULD LIKE TO SEE ONE-OFF, BULK ELECTION FUNDING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ELECTION CYCLE. ANY TWEET, ANY FACEBOOK MESSAGE, IN FACT ANY VISIT BY A POLITICIAN TO A SCHOOL OR A FAIR, I MEAN, THAT'S ALL ELECTIONEERING. SO WE'VE GOT THIS KIND OF ODD SITUATION WHERE WE ARE FREEING IT UP A LITTLE BIT, BUT NOT REALLY ENOUGH TO REFLECT THE REALITY OF CAMPAIGNING IN A MODERN ELECTION. SO FAR 22 PARTIES HAVE APPLIED FOR THE BROADCASTING ADVERTISING GRANTS. THOSE ALLOCATIONS WILL BE ANNOUNCED IN A FORTNIGHT. AND THEY SAY THEY'VE ONLY JUST BEGUN. Time to bring in our panel. This could be quite a big change. It is a big change. Can you change an outcome? I don't think it's as big as it is being made out to be. The core aspects of finding advertising never change. It is divvied up amongst the parties according to their support in the polls. And other things like by-election success. The changes are the party political broadcasts which were forced upon the broadcasters have gone. There is more freedom to spend the money social media. That is a big change. I think the Labour Party is really grasp this. There are raising a lot more money. That is all happening through email. Every second day, ice seem to give money to the Labour Party. The interesting thing is what happens on election day. There is a gap to use social media on election day. If you recall, David Cunliffe was penned by the electoral commission for doing it on a by election day. I think it was sequestered by election day. This may impact turnout. If the Labour Party and other parties can get on top of using social media on election day there may impact the low turnout amongst young people to their advantage. We saw the attack thing. We don't like that. Are we going to see any more about? I think we're going to see a lot more on that. There was a test done further don't vote for legalised marijuana party just as it was legal or not. It was decided in court that it was decided you can do that. An organisation can go out and quite legally run an attack ad. I think that means will see a few more attack ads. The basis premise though doesn't change. Whether you are doing it on Facebook or on twitter or on TV, when you come to election, you are really not there to brand and sell yourself. You're out there to crystallise what the public already think. There is a danger that the public still have to believe it. They had a good song, with the rowboats (?) It was very effective because the public already believe there was going to be a problem if you were the left block. Labour could have run that add against national, but the public didn't actually believe it. It doesn't actually change the fact that you've got to get the message right. For social media, you've got to be able to focus on target? It's making it more contemporary and up-to-date. In the end, you gotta be careful with social media. When it goes wrong, it unravels very very quickly. People need to be careful about this. I'm not in favour of state funding here, the fundraising is very much part of the democratic process. Who you talk to and who you can convince it you've got policies that are worth supporting, that lies underneath it. These days, databases and the way we mind those in acts as those people is just as important as the actual media that you use. Most political parties are spending more and more time on that. Frankly that's a better use of the money. Then just attacking people with nasty advertising. An ad I saw from Macron said that if you are claim it scientist, come and live in France. I retweeted that and shared on Facebook. If your friends are shared with you, you trust your friends more. He was so advanced on the social media think he was ready for hackers. On a local level, we saw it with Chloe Swarrbrick. She came in third because of social media. I like to make a point about negative advertising. In 2005 I ran a campaign that suffered from a huge negative advertising campaign funded by the brethren. I think that had a backlash and help the Labour Party win the election. But I think it could be seen that social media can motivate those people who otherwise would not participate. Now, this may be the key thing that changes the outcome of the election. There is about 1% in it. For a close election, it can be a clincher. There is no alternative to getting away from your computer. You're not going to win it from the computer board. You have to knock on doors and meet people. There is something else going on. There is quite big turnouts, and Andrew Little noted this. At public meetings, leaders are getting big turnouts. Gareth Morgan in particular, I don't know what's going on, but that usually tells you there is something rumbling underground that will burst in the elections. He has got some very interesting policies. He makes people think. I think people get lost in the media and think a tweet on the computer will solve the problem. But you have to have policies that are clear and easy to understand and appeal to people. What they're trying to do withadvertising is trying to get to the consideration set. In the last election 40% considered labour but only 25 actually did. You are trying to transform those consideration votes. If you are a smaller partner, if you are the Greens, the consideration set is about 20% but only 10 do. So you are using your ads to convert that into votes. YOUR FEEDBACK IS COMING UP AFTER THE BREAK, AND THERE'S PLENTY OF IT. PLUS ` THE PANEL GETS THE FINAL WORD ` THE HITS AND MISSES OF THE POLITICAL WEEK, UP NEXT. YOUR FEEDBACK NOW. ANDREW LITTLE GOT THE THUMBS UP FROM MARY FROM NELSON. SHE TEXTED, 'WELL DONE, ANDREW LITTLE. LOVE YOUR PASSION. 'I'M A NATIONAL SUPPORTER AND MAY VOTE DIFFERENTLY THIS ELECTION.' JIM YOUNG HAS EMAILED THAT, 'IF LABOUR, NZ FIRST AND THE GREENS GET INTO GOVERNMENT, 'WE'LL SOON HAVE A SURFEIT OF HOUSES, 'AS IMMIGRATION EVAPORATES AND DISAFFECTED KIWIS FLEE THE COUNTRY ` 'PROBLEM SOLVED.' RAQUEL BLACKBURN HAS TWEETED THAT SHE RESPECTS ANDREW LITTLE'S DECISION TO KEEP HIS FAMILY OUT OF THE PUBLIC EYE, BUT SAYS PEOPLE DO JUDGE POLITICIANS ON THEIR HOME LIVES. BRUCE SAYS VIA TEXT THAT MR LITTLE APPEARS TO BE CAPABLE OF MANAGING LABOUR, BUT IS HE CAPABLE OF MANAGING WILLIE JACKSON? We shall see effort comes to that. TIME FOR OUR POLITICAL HITS AND MISSES OF THE WEEK. What is your political hit of the week. The Nixon library in America trolling trump via Twitter. Fun factor even Nixon didn't fire the head of the FBI. I think the staff if I that got reprimanded. The other one was yesterday the law firm that Trump chose to prove that he has no connections with Russia actually was the Russian law firm of the year for its close connections to Russia last year. Kim Campbell. I have to congratulate the governor of the reserve bank for holding interest rates. I think that was no surprise. He said he is going to hold it until 2019. This gives a strong signal for exporters. Unfortunately it didn't get the publicity it deserves. The massive if you are interested in public health, read stage I on the report on the disaster of the poisoning of Havelock North. It is terrifying reading. It is the mine shaft canary for a whole lot of issues that sit under the local government act. There is a subtext in there about amalgamation and the capability of the local body. It is a long report and this is only part one. The media didn't do enough for that. My hit and Miss are both the same, and it is Willie Jackson. To win in politics you have to take a risk, and Andrew Little took a risk with Willie Jackson. He has a huge ego and a mouth to go with it. But it could be a hit, because he could turn the election. If he can deliver those Maori seats back to labour and get a decent vote. 'MARAE' IS NEXT. REMEMBER, Q+A REPEATS TONIGHT AT 11.35PM. THANKS FOR WATCHING, AND THANKS FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS. THOSE WERE THE QUESTIONS, AND THOSE WERE THE ANSWERS. THAT'S Q+A. SEE YOU NEXT SUNDAY MORNING AT 9.